Regaining Independence from Petroleum
by Steve Heckeroth
The problems associated with petroleum dependent transportation are only partially understood and generally ignored. Oil depletion, pollution and climate change are only the most obvious reasons to phase out the use of oil. Less obvious reasons are the impact of automobiles on communities, the economic implications of spending $1 billion a week on foreign oil, and the $100 billion a year spent on the treatment of diseases caused by poor air quality. Our survival depends on maintaining air, water and soil quality. The transition to a global economy is making transportation an ever-increasing part of everything that is purchased. This paper will suggest alternatives to oil dependent transportation.
1. INTRODUCTION
The foundation of sustainable transportation lies in planning our communities for people not cars. Suburban sprawl is a product of planning for one mode of transportation - the automobile. This has created a situation where few daily tasks, like going to work, school and the store can be accomplished without the use of a car. The result is polluted air, stress, isolation and wasted time. Although there are many options for reducing an individual's use of petroleum, including carpooling, public transportation, bicycling, walking, and working at home they are often not readily available and therefore not utilized more extensively. In order to affect any significant reduction in petroleum consumption these alternatives must be made safe, convenient and attractive.
2. LIVABLE COMMUNTIES
The primary focus of planning should be on proximity of housing to services, which would be accomplished by mixed-use zoning. Convenient, safe and attractive pedestrian and bicycle routes would connect people to stores, schools, daycare, employment, and public transportation. Designing diversity into communities will decrease the need for people to leave their neighborhoods for daily tasks.
Examples of such communities abound in Europe where towns evolved before cars existed. There the use of a bicycle is not limited to those who want to improve their fitness, it is a common mode of transportation for people of all ages, as are people’s feet. The availability of bike paths, sidewalks and traffic calming measures makes this possible. In the United States riding a bicycle can be dangerous since people usually have to share the road with cars.
In neighborhoods where people walk and bicycle social interaction is increased and neighbors are more likely to be friends. This is in sharp contrast to auto-centric communities where people spend wasted hours every day driving to and from work, then get in their car again to visit friends. Close proximity to services, as well as recreation would also decrease the alienation of the elderly, children, physically challenged, and the poor, all of who are at a disadvantage because they lack mobility without a car.
Farmland, green belts and wild areas should be preserved and could form the natural borders for neighborhoods and communities. Examples can be found in Germany, where every new neighborhood must incorporate green belts. These serve the function of defining place and offering space for wild life, agriculture and recreation.
Transportation options need to fit the individual, as well as the environment they live in. A person living in a climate where it rains 6 months out of the year would prefer an enclosed neighborhood electric vehicle (NEV) or public transportation to bicycling. NEVs come in a variety of shapes, depending on the environment in which they are needed. For example, golf carts have been legalized for travel on city streets in Palm Springs. Other examples are enclosed three-wheelers legally registered as motorcycles or electric assist bicycles.
The concept of Pedestrian Pockets is one that holds promise in this country. Defined as a balanced, mixed-use area within a ¼-mile (400 m) walking radius of a light rail station, the Pedestrian Pocket can be applied to already existing neighborhoods, as well as new developments. This planning concept does not eliminate the car but rather offers transportation alternatives, primarily walking. Its focus is on connecting people with the services they need without reliance on the automobile.
3. RAIL
In the 30s and 40s oil, auto and rubber companies teamed up to buy and dismantle light rail systems in cities across the country. With few exceptions they were successful in totally eliminating light rail and forcing everyone who could afford them into cars. Sixty years later, light rail is experiencing a renaissance. Light rail reduces traffic and air pollution by taking as many as 350 to 400 cars off the streets with just one four-car light rail train. Increasing light rail transit is becoming a more and more popular alternative in many municipalities. The Sacramento Regional Transit authority, for instance, has an extensive plan for improvements and expansion of service. Sacramento, which has the seventh worst air pollution in the country and a growing population, is making mass transit a priority. Sacramento’s light rail system enjoys a daily ridership of 27,000 people. One of the planned expansions is only 6.3 miles (10 km) long but would be able to carry as many as 15,000 more riders every day.
Heavy rail has an advantage over roads for long distance hauling or commuting because it produces fewer emissions and the right-of-way takes up less space. The new high-speed electric trains in Europe and Japan are zero emission and much faster than road travel. In the US most transportation infrastructure is funded by taxes on fuel. The most wasteful and polluting modes of transportation use the most fuel and generate the vast majority of revenue. As a result, toxic emissions are rewarded with more pavement. Public funds should be used for the public good, not to subsidize increased fuel consumption.
4. AIR TRAVEL
It is easy to confuse speed with efficiency but with few exceptions, like stop and go city driving, efficiency drops as speed increases. It is the burning of literally billions of years of stored solar energy in the air and under the earth’s crust that makes speed possible. The first photosynthesis took place 3.5 billion years ago. Since that time there has been an incremental increase in the free oxygen in the air and hydrocarbons in the ground. It took 3 billion years to create the conditions that allowed animal life to exist and another 500 million years to culminate in the evolution of the human species. This length of time can be visualized by making one mile equal to one billion years. On this scale the 10,000 years of human history equals 5/8 of an inch (16 mm) and the last 100 years of automobile and air travel, which have consumed almost half of the petroleum resource is represented by the thickness of a piece of paper.
Air travel is an unsustainable form of transportation. Air travel consumes twice as much energy per passenger mile as travel on Amtrak. But even worse, the effect of aircraft emissions on climate change is seven times greater than trains or boat per passenger mile. Planes deposit their exhaust at very high altitudes where the air is thin and more damage is done. Transportation needs to shift back to the earth. High-speed rail could replace many plane trips and boats could serve some needs. It is important to consider that just because planes are available doesn’t mean they should be used extensively.
Telecommunications could and should replace a large amount of business travel. The energy cost of a transcontinental or international teleconference is miniscule when compared to flying across three time zones. Video conferencing even allows the participants to have eye contact. Documents can be faxed or e-mailed to reach their destination almost instantly. Telecommunication can provide everything but the handshake.
5. ZERO EMISSION MANDATE
Roads and heavy rail will continue to be the primary transportation infrastructure, especially for commerce. With this in mind, the immediate priority should be to cut back and finally eliminate vehicle emissions. The California Zero Emission Mandate charted a course for accomplishing that goal. The author and many other clean air enthusiasts took up the challenge and started small companies to build zero emission vehicles to make the mandate a reality while the auto industry drug its feet and actively opposed the Mandate. In 1994 the auto and oil industry teamed up to spend a documented $40 million on a campaign to eliminate the Mandate. They were successful in pushing back the 1998 2% Mandate to 2003. In 1998 they were again successful in reducing the 2003 Mandate from 10% to 4%. It appears the auto and oil industry are now attempting to eliminate the Zero Emission Mandate altogether in favor of low emission hybrid vehicles.
Honda has dropped its four passenger battery electric EV Plus in favor of a two-seater hybrid that gets 70 mpg (425 km/l). GM has discontinued the production of the EV1 for some mysterious reason and has come out with a prototype hybrid called the Precept. Toyota has come out with the Prius, a hybrid vehicle that gets 55 mpg (330 km/l) but is still keeping its battery electric RAV4 EV in production. Ford also expects to come out with hybrid prototypes that get as many as 80 mpg (480 km/l). In addition, Ford has purchased THINK Group, maker of urban low speed electric vehicles and electric bikes. Hybrids are a move in the right direction but at the same time the auto industry has taken advantage of a lack of fuel efficiency standards for SUVs and pickup trucks and through advertising made the sale of these gas-guzzling vehicles surpass that of all other automobiles.
Hydrogen fuel cells also hold promise in the future if the hydrogen used comes from a source other than fossil fuel. A vehicle powered by a fuel cell is essentially an electric vehicle without a battery. Daimler-Chrysler is working on a fuel cell car but fuel cells will probably be mass-produced first for busses and trucks.
Electric vehicles could already be todays’commuter car if they had been embraced by the auto industry in the early ‘90s. Most EVs now have a range of over 100 miles (160 km) per charge and the average commute is only 16 miles (25 km). The auto industry contends that the charging infrastructure is not available but most EVs have convenience chargers on board that can be plugged into any 110 Volt outlet.
This makes EV charging opportunities thousands of times more available than gas stations. Convenient parking places equipped with electrical outlets are available in places ranging from municipal parking lots to shopping malls. New battery technologies, like nickel-metal-hydride or lithium polymer would double or even triple the range of EVs making their performance competitive with gas vehicles.
6. ADVANTAGES OF ELECTRIC PROPULSION
The primary advantages of electric propulsion are zero emission and the ability to use renewable energy sources for charging. But there are many other benefits.
| About The 1963 Electric Type 34 Karman Ghia
 by Stephen Heckeroth & Christiane McLees
The 1990 California Zero Emission Mandate fueled an electric vehicle Rennaisance. My company, MendoMotive, came into being as a result of the prospect of mandated electric car sales in 1998. The company converted one Pontiac Fiero, one Volkswagen Vanagon, one Volkswagen Type 34 Karman Ghia, and produced 4 electric Porsche Spyders, between 1992 and 1994. All the cars used off-the-shelf, inexpensive DC technology. Sales projections were good for 1995 but that year the auto industry and the oil companies spent $30 million to turn public opinion against electric vehicles and push back the Mandate to 2003. MendoMotive went out of business but the cars produced are still on the road. This report focuses on the Karman Ghia which is used daily by the Heckeroth family.
|
